Ryan’s decision comes a week after Democrats disrupted House activities with a nearly 26-hour sit-in demanding action on gun control. It’s unclear whether Ryan’s proposal would include the broad “no fly, no buy” proposal Democrats have supported or a more limited version endorsed by the National Rifle Association.

…

On the call, Ryan said it was common sense that suspects on terror watch lists should not be able to buy guns, but the Wisconsin Republican wants to be sure that any provision protects due process for people who may mistakenly be added to such lists.

I give the House measures as much credence as I give the Senate’s – none.

It’s not just firearms freedom they’re after. They want to shut down free speech too:

Democrats targeting content and control of the Internet, especially from conservative sources, are pushing hard to layer on new regulations and even censorship under the guise of promoting diversity while policing bullying, warn commissioners from the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Election Commission.

“Protecting freedom on the Internet is just one vote away,” said Lee E. Goodman, a commissioner on the FEC which is divided three Democrats to three Republicans. “There is a cloud over your free speech.”

Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) has proposed the Terrorist Firearms Prevention Act of 2016, popularly known as the Collins Amendment. Who could possibly be against such a thing? I am, for one. Her proposal is similar to Diane Feinstein’s S.551 and several other meaningless measures floating around the septic tank of Congress. Her’s is the one in the news today having passed a procedural vote 52-46. Here’s the majority of the Amendment (click the picture for the whole thing):

The vote had to be of the unrecorded, oral variety as I can’t find reference to it. Congress frequently avoids such disclosure. Why would anyone want to readily know how his Senator voted on something anyway? There are reasons a rational man would oppose such a “common sense” law. Anyway, support for this version of gun control is being hailed as some sort of crack in the GOP/NRA wall against a safer America.

Lindsey Graham (R-SC) is a co-sponsor of the Act so we can assume he was among the 52. His explanation of its provisions highlight the problems with the Amendment and various other government projects. Per the Times story:

Republicans find it much easier to explain enacting gun restrictions to constituents devoted to the Second Amendment if they can frame their position as an act against terrorism.

“The Constitution’s a sacred document, but it is not a suicide pact,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina and a gun owner. “This is not hard for me. Due process is important, but at the end of the day, we are at war.”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today made this statement after voting in support of the Collins amendment to prevent terrorists from buying guns.

The amendment survived a procedural vote, 52-46, and remains eligible for a final vote.

Graham said:

“At the end of the day this really is about counter-terrorism, not gun control. We are a nation at war against radical Islam and under increasing threats both here at home and abroad.

“President Obama’s foreign policy has been a failure and helped give rise to the very threats we face. I have long argued we must do more to counter the threat abroad. However, it is also important we take steps here at home to protect ourselves as well. It’s why I supported the Collins Amendment.

“Simply put — I don’t want anyone who is too dangerous to fly on a plane to buy a gun.

“To be on these lists today means there is reasonable suspicion and credible evidence that the individual in question is involved with or in support of terrorist activities. There are about 109,000 people on these lists and 99% of them are foreign nationals, not U.S. citizens. There are only about 2,700 Americans who could be impacted by this measure.

“I believe in due process and I was insistent the amendment contain provisions to ensure those who should not be on these lists can clear their name. We put the burden of proof on the government to show the individual is a danger and should not be allowed to purchase a gun. If the government fails, the individual’s rights are upheld and the government will pay their legal tab.

“This debate will continue and I will continue to work to find common ground that both protects the rights of law-abiding citizens and prevents terror suspects from purchasing guns. The differences between the competing approaches are narrowing.

“I will continue to strive to be a senator that can bring us together and find common ground in times of great threat.
####

He’s right about continuing to strive to be a senator but all wrong beyond that.

The Act isn’t about counter-terrorism or about gun control. It’s just another law and another burden on the people.

Graham is correct that Hussein Obama’s policies have only made the threat of terrorism worse. To be fair though, Hussein Obama has only continued the disaster of a policy put in place by Bush 43. And Graham’s proposals on the subject, whenever he spouts off, are always of the kind which would make things EVEN WORSE.

At home he says there are 109,000 people on the watch lists. Of those only 1% or 2,700 are U.S. Citizens (closer to 2.5% by my math). If 106,300 foreign nationals are on the lists of suspected terrorists, why the hell are they not rounded up and deported immediately?

Neither Graham nor any other Senator really cares about Due Process. This proposal, like S.551, has a huge loophole to allow the Attorney General carte blanche authority over who goes on the list and allows the government to ultimately assert national security as an end-around to avoid due process in court. By Graham’s math that means 2,700 Americans right now could be out of luck; the list would surely grow if the Act passes into law. Don’t look for any of the foreigners to go home; in fact, more and more will just keep coming.

Graham’s position may be summed up as: “We’re at war (with an enemy we created and brought home). Therefore the Second Amendment and due process of law can go out the window.”

The saddest part of all this (as if it isn’t sad enough) is that the whole thing is pointless. Gun control does not work to stop gun violence. Period. None of the criminals and terrorists Collins and Graham feign interest in stopping would be subjected to any provisions of the Act. The University of Chicago “just discovered” that criminals don’t buy guns the legal way (surprise, surprise!). So much for soft gun control controlling crime. Even hardened European gun control does next to nothing to stop gun violence. When it comes to government gun control it’s all about the state controlling citizens and about perception (image over substance).

Then there’s the issue of bombs…

All this shows again and again you cannot trust the people who created the problem to know how to solve it. Don’t buy the gun-fly lie.

Hussein Obama, ever one of intrinsic flippancy, once remarked that ISIS was merely a “JV team” in terms of war-making and of being dangerous. I can’t recall if he said that while playing golf or from a vacation.

A three-part attack beginning with a diversion is a new level of sophistication. That should scare the U.S. and Europe.

Three months after attacking Brussels airport, terrorists have shown in the attack on Istanbul’s international airport an alarming ability to stay one move ahead of the defenses put in place to stop them—an agility in planning that could present a new and serious threat to airports in the U.S.

Most experts agree that the Istanbul atrocity has the hallmarks of ISIS. Even then, the sophistication of how the attack was carried out has surprised them.

It was carried out in a way that suggests the kind of advance intelligence, careful study of a target, and cool execution that would normally be practised by Western special forces.

CIA Director John Brennan said that the suicide bombings in Istanbul, Turkey bore the signs of ISIS and should serve as a warning to Americans that the terrorist group is aiming to carry out similar attacks in the U.S.

“I’d be surprised if [ISIS] is not trying to carry out that kind of attack in the United States,” Brennan told Yahoo News Tuesday evening.

…

He said ISIS has so far been unable to attack the U.S. directly because of effective homeland security and intelligence measures, but warned that the militants would continue their attempts to infiltrate American defenses.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper raised similar concerns last month. He told CNN in May that ISIS has the capability to conduct a large-scale Paris-style attack in the U.S.

They haven’t yet but they have the capacity… What was Orlando? JV practice? What happened at the Amarillo Wal-Mart? Who attacked Trump supporters in California? What about San Bernardino? Boston? Am I just imagining that these things happened? Or, are these people blind?

They don’t understand ISIS, a thing they created. ISIS doesn’t need to operate like a traditional state or army; it can call on radical cells and individuals as needed. They don’t consider ISIS a threat even as it rapidly captures territory in multiple countries. They warn about possible future attacks as we are attacked every week. All the while, they stir the mix of terrorism in the Middle East and continue to import enormous numbers of radicals.

Our government is behaving like a JV team. That, or they’re trying to throw the game.

ISIS’s June jihad against the West rolls on. Istanbul has been Western on again and off again for thousands of years. I suppose they’re “on” right now given yesterday’s attack. Forty to fifty are dead and hundreds wounded following the shootings and bombings.

This story is not about the attack, per se – too many of those happening to give full coverage. This is about what you can do about these things – beyond posting flag overlays and “We Are Turkey” or “Istanbul Strong” on Facebook.

There are strategic and tactical measures involved in avoiding and/or dealing with such events. They are related but different.

Strategy: a plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.

Tactic: an immediate item done in support of a strategy.

When confronted by mindless violence and terrorism one can (must) employ some level of strategic thinking. That should include relying, to some degree, on official plans and actions. Turkey sits right on the border of the Islamic State’s wars. They have plans, strategies to keep terrorists out of their country. Should terrorists make it in, they still have alternate plans – airport security, armed police, etc. The United States is in a similar situation, thousands of miles away, thanks to decades of suicidal military and immigration policies.

The best of these types of plans obviously don’t work sometimes. It is therefore important for the individual to modify his personal strategic plans accordingly. Airports and other popular destinations may be terrorist targets of opportunity. Thus, one might want to avoid them if possible. If not, move as deep into the “secured” areas as fast as possible.

The simultaneous usage of firearms and explosives presents a different kind of problem. The knee-jerk reaction of some is to call for a ban on guns. This never works but, even if it did, there’s the bomb issue. Bombs themselves are illegal in most places, their use is certainly illegal. However, it is impossible to make illegal all the simple things one can do to build a bomb. Others have a knee-jerk reaction to such events in calling on good guys with guns to stop the bad guys with guns. In and of itself, this generally works – it did at the Istanbul airport yesterday evening. A terrorist with a gun stopped shooting when a police officer (with a gun) shot him. Then again, there was a bomb.

Tactically speaking, the police and the individual are essentially on the same grounds when terrorists strike – in the “sh!t hits the fan” scenario. In these cases what you do and how you do it can help save your life. If you cannot avoid the situation, how you handle it is critical.

The police officer’s actions in the above-linked story are a case study in fighting modern terrorism. The officer won the gun battle and then had to run for his life before the terrorist detonated his bomb (graphic video is embedded in the story).

Daily Mail. Use the link above to see video.

The safest course of action for surviving these attacks is to get away as fast as possible – run, don’t walk, don’t be a hero. If you can’t run, get behind something solid. If there’s nothing solid, hit the ground with you head pointed away from the attacker and covered by the arms.

If you are armed and engage the terrorist, only do so observing the four cardinal rules of gun safety – they really are universal. Assume the terrorist has a bomb. This is part of “knowing your target.” Assume the bomb will be detonated – either by a wounded/dying terrorist or by your shots themselves. Watch the Daily Mail video and the officer’s actions. It’s his job to rush into danger. In a similar situation you should try to do the same thing (if you must) from behind cover or from a distance.

None of this is pleasant to contemplate but it is reality. It’s a remote reality, like a tornado or a house fire but we routinely practice how to handle those. There are almost too many possibilities to plan against in stopping terrorism but a little something is better than nothing.

“The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.” – Sun Tzu

If our enemy is a bad, weak, or boring smoke, then the Ruination may be the supreme cigar. Name aside, there is no fighting, just pure enjoyment.

What. A. Cigar. This big brown beauty delivers tons of smoke and flavor right from the first puff. The Ruination packs a punch, both in terms of quality and taste, for a well-sub-$10 stick. By the way, to make sure you get the best price possible for your Man O’ War, consult the good folks at Cigars City, where the advertised sticks are never “out of stock”.

My Robusto boasted a superb draw born of excellent quality and solid construction. As one can easily see from the above photo, this smoke has smooth lines which match its smooth yet energetic taste. This particular size, 5 ½ x 54, is perfect for after dinner enjoyment or while passing a long (well-deserved) lunch break. Take any break and add this masculine masterpiece from master cigar-maker Abdel “A.J.” Fernandez of Tabacalera Fernandez, Esteli (new site under development). It’s a great example of the ages-old Cuban rolling legacy alive and thriving in Nicaragua today.

I would classify my Robusto’s strength as a fuller-medium. Really, for me personally, I’d call it medium, but I call most cigars “medium” – either through my increased fortitude or loss of senses – jury is still out. Anyway, the usual, seasoned cigar smoker should find the Ruination full-bodied but not too strong. If fact, it may be just right for any veteran. (Newbies might need to ease into it to avoid … that unpleasantness … you know what I mean … or you will. Ha ha ha).

The burn began with a slight unevenness which rapidly worked itself out. After the initial light-up the burn was perfect as was the draw – lots and lots of generous smoke, not too hot and none too mild. The ash held on in average fashion – and I didn’t burn myself! Aside from a foolish, self-inflicted blister, I hate nothing more than a poor-burning stick that detracts from the tasting experience. No such worries here.

Rich flavors appeared immediately and developed in wonderful complexity. Underlying everything is the earthy, woody, maybe leathery deliciousness born of the ligero filler from Nicaraguan and Honduras. The binder is a top-notch Nicaraguan and the exquisite wrapper is an oily, deep-brown, sun grown leaf from Ecuador. Happy notes of lively pepper punctuate the hearty smoke culminating in a rich finish both toasty and mildly spiced.

Think of the Ruination as a go-to when you need a great experience of slightly higher power yet of easy handling. I had mine during the evening while watching Lightning Bugs flit about. I dare to venture you might enjoy the smoke accompanied by a stout bourbon, a good single-malt, or even a dark rum. I find most stronger cigars go well with a hefty beer though the Southern ambient evening temperatures run some interference during the summer. Again, those unaccustomed to a little horsepower might be advised to eat a good meal first. You’ll figure it out. There are no wrong approaches in cigar-land. Let this Man O’ War bring you a little peace and happiness one night soon.

ISIS, as part of the June jihad, published (somewhere) a list of some 8,000 ordinary people – mostly Americans – the terror non-group wants dead. As the Wall Street Journal and Snopes pointed out, the list appears to be a random collection of names easily obtained on-line. The disturbing thing is that along with the names ISIS included addresses and other contact information. Actually, being on such a list, even if it is random, is a pretty disturbing thought.

Also disturbing is the apparent failure of the FBI to notify many Americans of their inclusion on the list. According to a Circa news story, many people didn’t know they were potential targets until the Circa reporter informed them.

The current list brings the number of Americans, by name, ISIS would like to see murdered to around 15,000. ISIS is not a state; it’s barely a group. But it has a wide reach via the large network of lone wolf terrorists and terror cells conveniently located throughout the West. The name Omar Mateen comes to mind.

The odds of being a terror victim are relatively low but the threat exists. In the past few years we’ve seen attacks at nightclubs, theaters, races, offices, political events, restaraunts, newspaper offices, and many other locations. Regardless of the odds, it would be nice to think law enforcement would notify people specifically called out (even if randomly). They don’t hesitate to notify people who they claim owe taxes. The government’s priorities may be out of whack. Are yours?

“Judge not, that ye be not judged.” Matthew 7:1 (KJV). If being a judge means proclaiming judgment, then would it be judgmental to judge judges? You be the judge of that.

Federal appellate judge Richard Posner, the veritable father of “law and economics” is accustomed to passing judgment, in and out of court. He recently told Slate his views on the demise of modern American law schools and of the Constitution, one in conjunction with the other.

He warned that law school faculty is out of touch with the actual practice of the law. They are. Says Posner, “I think law schools should be hiring a higher percentage of lawyers with significant practical experience.” He’s right and continued:

And on another note about academia and practical law, I see absolutely no value to a judge of spending decades, years, months, weeks, day, hours, minutes, or seconds studying the Constitution, the history of its enactment, its amendments, and its implementation (across the centuries—well, just a little more than two centuries, and of course less for many of the amendments). Eighteenth-century guys, however smart, could not foresee the culture, technology, etc., of the 21st century. Which means that the original Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the post–Civil War amendments (including the 14th), do not speak to today.

He’s right there too. Other than paying it lip service no-one in government – not judges, not Congress, not the President, certainly not the bureaucracy – none of them heed the Constitution whatsoever. I may disagree with Posner’s interpretation approach to the subject but we can agree with the end result. Nino Scalia was the last man to hold the Constitution in awe and he is gone. It’s just what you eventually get from a strong central government, like that one birthed by the Constitution.

However, Posner need not worry about the academic nuances of Constitutional study. That just doesn’t exist anymore. As I noted back in 2013 the one thing left out of Constitutional Law in law school is … the Constitution. To the academics it’s just a list of inexhaustible government powers and a few, pet privileges they call “rights”. It is what it is, what it has become, what it was.

In fairness to Posner, he’s fair across the board when condemning tradition. He’s been trying to abolish reliance on Harvard’s Blue Book for a generation. That one, unlike the Founder’s scribbles, is strictly observed in law school or was when I was there (been a little while). True to disjointed form, almost no practicing lawyers and fewer and fewer trial judges actually observe Harvard’s citation system – they just cut and paste from screen to screen. It makes sense; if the Constitution is out and the laws are never far behind in obsolescence, what’s the point in properly noting them?

One thing is certain – U.S. law schools and the legal system need a severe overhaul soon. On that, we can pass judgment.

It’s 2016 and the Obamacare Tax and Insurance Company Enrichment Act still regularly makes the news – usually for additional premium increases or for doctors bailing from the system or from the profession. All in the name of revenue. You’re welcome.

*****

Viernheim Shooting Update – STILL NOTHING!

Pushing a week and still no word on the shooter’s identity beyond “broken German” and disturbed and rank speculation. “The Darmstadt prosecutor remains silent, because the investigations continue.” I read somewhere they considered him an acute threat. To what, I wonder? The EU? Merkel’s Fourth Reich Unholy Empire? They say ignorance is bliss but this is bothering me…

For some it’s about taking advantage of tragedy and belittling those they hate. I almost didn’t include this first story due to the inherently bigotry and low-brow “journalism” behind it. Still, here it is. A woman in Texas, a self-described Second Amendment proponent and gun owner, committed an atrocious crime (the facts of which I don’t have and don’t want) – she apparently murdered her own daughters after an argument. The woman was also shot and killed by the police. Three women dead for no good reason – terrible.

Too bad for Christian Christy Byrd Sheats two daughter’s, 17 and 22, Sheats had a gun with which to “protect her family.” That gun was used to gun down both girls in the street after a family argument.

Sheats was then killed by police after refusing to drop her weapon, literally bringing home the insanity of the famed phrase “from my cold, dead, hands.”

Note the immediate description of the shooter as a Christian. Would Thompson dare describe a Muslim terrorist as a Muslim terrorist? I think not. I did a quick Googling of “Helen Thompson” and “Muslim” and the first thing I saw was Thompson berating Donald Trump for trying to “initiate a Muslim witch hunt”. I guess witch hunts aren’t even for witches anymore – just Christians.

Thompson continues:

This woman appears to be the poster child of white, GOP America. She praised her religion, loved veterans and country music, praised Ronnie Reagan and George W., and loved her guns. She was a Texas resident, originally from Alabama. This woman literally reeked of right wing Americana — of normal, gun-loving life. She loved her grandmother, had been bitten by a black widow, and basically, seemed to love life and her children.

The white America. Would Thompson ever write about one of the thousands of murders committed by blacks each year (47% of total murders vs. 10% of the population)? No. It’s just a white, Christian, all-American kind of thing. Y’all wouldn’t understand.

Thompson didn’t even call for more gun control beyond her ridicule. “No good guy with a gun stopped this senseless murder by a ‘good guy’ with a gun,” she ranted – what a tired, worn, anecdotal, and worthless “argument”. If not even true in this case – the police officer “good guy” used a gun to stop the white, Christian bad gal.

Maybe some of the problems the left has with guns in America comes more from a hatred of America and its people than from a hatred of guns. These cretins, seething in their hatred, want the government to disarm all the white Christians – and everyone else of decent persuasion.

I have no use for the government at all. Some people on “my side” do. Droves of my friends boast about obtaining their concealed carry permits. Actress Kelly McGillis just joined the ranks of the permitted carriers following an attack at her North Carolina home.

I like that they have armed themselves in a world seemingly gone mad but I do not like the way they have done it. Why a permit from the state? I know it’s the law in most places. I understand that. Most people who get the permits are law-abiding. It’s a law that shouldn’t be abided by – or exist. Why should there be permits for the exercise of the right to carry anyway? Rights do not require permission slips.

I sympathize with and applaud Mrs. McGillis’s decision to arm and defend herself. I found it odd though that she took the measure following a home invasion. North Carolina does not require a permit of any kind to defend oneself at one’s home. I realize she obviously wants protection outside her house too. Thus the permit. And, thus, my problem.

Running to the government for permission to protect one’s life is little different in my mind to running to the government to prohibit others from protecting themselves. Either way, the government is not the answer. Usually, it’s the problem.

In a sense everyone wants reasonable “gun control”. Some, like Thompson, would have the state “control” guns by banning them from white, Christian hands at least. Gun owners generally favor the responsible, personal “control” of the individual firearm. If, to them, that means acquiescing to a state law, then they do it. Either way it’s the state, the state, the state. How about some gun control for the state itself?

In addition to regulating firearms, the government has a long history of widely distributing them, usually with terrible consequences. Most of government works like that – they find a small problem and come up with a solution that creates a bigger problem. I suppose it justifies their existence. I don’t see the need.

A few years ago the ATF was caught red-handed selling and then giving guns to Mexican drug cartels and to criminals. Some of those guns came back, fast and furious, and were used to kill Americans. The ATF isn’t alone. They are novices compared to the CIA. The “intelligence” agency has taken to giving arms to Syrian “rebels”. Many of those weapons were stolen and ended up on the black market – gun show of choice for terrorists. And, you guessed it, some of those arms have killed Americans. By arming one side (maybe more) of this conflict which does not concern the U.S. the government helps generate more angry “refugees” who then migrate to the West for various purposes – some for aid and reflief, others for revenge and crime. Little problem, “solution”, bigger problems.

The left tries to scare people with stories of white, Christian Americans wielding automatic assault rifles and rocket launchers. They want the government to do something about it despite the fact it isn’t a problem. The government does do something! It supplies “Kalashnikov assault rifles, mortars and rocket-propelled grenades” to rebels and then to the black market and to terrorists. Nice, huh?

Another of the left’s arguments for more government control is that the firearms available when the Second Amendment was ratified were flintlocks and thus those are the only ones the people are entitled to keep and bear. By that logic, shouldn’t the CIA be running muskets and not rocket launchers? Maybe people like Thompson should limit their writing to quill pens. All beside the point.

How about less government for a change? How about limiting or banning the state’s use of firearms (and rockets and grenades)? Might that make for a safer society? As is, they give us freedom control, crime, war, mindless intervention, black markets, and terrorism; all that in addition to rules, regulations, taxes, inflation, oppression, etc. More government, more crime. Why have it or its controls?